D&D (2024) Greyhawk Confirmed. Tell Me Why.

[Reynard]

From another thread:

The digital Game Informer issue is also out, with a different article that drops some additional details.

Game Informer Issue 366 – Hades II Page 16

gameinformer.mydigitalpublication.com

From the sound of it, Aasimar are in the PHB. "The classic options like humans and elves ... are joined by new included options, like the planetouched Aasimar, the hulking Goliath, and mighty Orcs."

The sample campaign setting in the DMG is indeed Greyhawk. "After very few official releases in the last couple of decades, the world of Greyhawk takes center stage. The book fleshes out Greyhawk to illustrate how to create campaign settings of your own." There's even a poster map, with the world of Greyhawk on one side and the city on the other.

For the Monster Manual, they tease expanding some of the classic monsters into "families" with more examples at different CR levels. The given example is a lower CR proto-vampire and a higher CR Nightbringer vampire.

Emphasis mine

So, I was very, very wrong. I was sure they would have created something new with appeal directed at GenZ players. Not the first time I have been wrong. Oh well.

But, I am curious why. Why Greyhawk? I mean, sure, 50th anniversary, but is that all? What does Greyhawk have about it that makes it a good fit for the vast majority of current and potential future players who have never known GH?

For the record, I am a GenXer who grew up with BECMI and 2E. I never played in Greyhawk, but I was aware of it because of Dragon Magazine mostly. Until Eberron appeared with 3.5, the only setting I used with an depth or regularity was Krynn/Dragonlance. We played in "The Known World" but never got more in depth than what was in the Expert book.

Anyway: why do YOU think they decided on Greyhawk for the example DMG setting?

 

[Cadence]

From another thread:

Emphasis mine

So, I was very, very wrong. I was sure they would have created something new with appeal directed at GenZ players. Not the first time I have been wrong. Oh well.

But, I am curious why. Why Greyhawk? I mean, sure, 50th anniversary, but is that all? What does Greyhawk have about it that makes it a good fit for the vast majority of current and potential future players who have never known GH?

For the record, I am a GenXer who grew up with BECMI and 2E. I never played in Greyhawk, but I was aware of it because of Dragon Magazine mostly. Until Eberron appeared with 3.5, the only setting I used with an depth or regularity was Krynn/Dragonlance. We played in "The Known World" but never got more in depth than what was in the Expert book.

Anyway: why do YOU think they decided on Greyhawk for the example DMG setting?

Assume the brand new players would buy whatever the current one is.

And does it really matter which new one it is for the folks who started with 5e, as long as it is one they haven't seen?

So that leaves figuring out what will work best for the whiney old players that have stuck with 5e so far: Greyhawk, Mystara, or Nentir Vale with world axis flavors. Which of those is biggest fan base? Which fans will be most grateful if it is done well (and not just whine about what else they miss)? And which fans will be the most fun to watch the wailing and gnashing of teeth from if they screw it up (or just add in things that weren't there before)?

 

[Reynard]

Assume the brand new players would buy whatever the current one is.

And does it really matter which new one it is for the folks who started with 5e, as long as it is one they haven't seen?

So that leaves figuring out what will work best for the whiney old players that have stuck with 5e so far: Greyhawk, Mystara, or Nentir Vale with world axis flavors. Which of those is biggest? Which will be most grateful if it is done well (and not just whine about what else they miss)? And which will be the most fun to wash the wailing and gnashing of teeth if they screw it up (or just add in things that weren't there before)?

Greyhawk is a world inspired by Gygax's love of sword and sorcery pulp fantasy and hard coded medievalism. I just don't understand how that is going to appeal to generations raised on Avatar, Harry Potter and Steven Universe.

 

[Willie the Duck]

I suspect it makes it more clearly an example, rather than FR with D&D2014 seeming more like an implied default. For that purpose, I think it works really well. Many previous-edition-but-not-AD&D D&Ders have heard of Greyhawk, but quite possibly don't really know much about it (excepting maybe the deities if they played 3e). Few people feel beholden to novels or TSR-era setting guides or other things the way Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance do (also no living authors as a potential source of friction).

 

[Parmandur]

First note, Gen Zers are starting to age out of the target audience for D&D, Gen Alpha is the upcoming target.

As to Greyhawk...it is perfect. The actual Setting itself, at core, is a 32 page 1E booklet worth of information, which is the ideal size for a chapter in the DMG (we know now that Greyhawk and "how to build out your Setting" is Chapter 9 of the new DMG). It follows all the core assumptions of D&D, everything in the new PHB and MM will fit in without issues.

It is nearly a blank slate, a canvas for a DM and players to develop in play. Forgotten Realms is too detailed for this purpose, Eberron is too quirky, Nerrath is too little detailed.

And Greyhawk is a touchstone to the origins of the hobvy.

 

[Reynard]

Maybe they will at least finally address that it is okay to limit options for the purpose of setting coherence. "Dwarves in Greyhawk can't use arcane magic, so they may not be Wizards."

Lol. No. That is NEVER going to happen.

 

[Pauln6]

Greyhawk leans heavily into Lord of the Rings for its baseline assumptions. Day to day living is not fantastical but there are fantastic people and places. It was a martial heavy, human-centric campaign but the City of Greyhawk itself was one of the more fantastical places. Maybe it's so retro, it came back into fashion.

 

[Parmandur]

Maybe they will at least finally address that it is okay to limit options for the purpose of setting coherence. "Dwarves in Greyhawk can't use arcane magic, so they may not be Wizards."

Lol. No. That is NEVER going to happen.

This version of Greyhawk is probavly going to have a healthy dose of 3E Greyhawk, in terms of "Everything D&D Goes".

 

[Reynard]

Greyhawk leans heavily into Lord of the Rings for its baseline assumptions.

Did anyone else feel that rumble as Gygax spun in his grave?

Day to day living is not fantastical but there are fantastic people and places. It was a martial heavy, human-centric campaign but the City of Greyhawk itself was one of the more fantastical places.

That's the euro-centric faux-medievalism Gygax loved so much which does not seem to be much in fashion outside of Game of Thrones.

Maybe it's so retro, it came back into fashion.

That's always possible.

 

[Reynard]

This version of Greyhawk is probavly going to have a healthy dose of 3E Greyhawk, in terms of "Everything D&D Goes".

How did they justify it then? I am just curious. Greyhawk never grabbed my attention enough to read more than a few Dragon articles.